Canon is large because of printers. Nikon's sell well because they are great cameras. For people who know the difference, price is not the only criteria for choosing a camera. Personally I do not seen anything in the Canon line I would be interested in, not even their main product; printers. I don't like to spend all my time trying to fix artifacts, shadow noise and banding.
--
Stan
St Petersburg Russia

I'd love to see sales figures, but I would bet that the 5d2 sales beat the d700/d3s and d3X combined by a ratio of 5:1. Canon are plenty popular. Don't let the internet forums delude you!

spbStan
wrote:

Canon is large because of printers. Nikon's sell well because they are great cameras. For people who know the difference, price is not the only criteria for choosing a camera. Personally I do not seen anything in the Canon line I would be interested in, not even their main product; printers. I don't like to spend all my time trying to fix artifacts, shadow noise and banding.
--
Stan
St Petersburg Russia

I have read in the forums that Canon are three times the size of Nikon.

If Canon as a company are three times larger than Nikon, why don't they drastically drop their prices on DSLR's and lenses.

Then after a time when Nikon are bust, Canon can up their prices and charge what they want!

With all the people invested in Nikon gear they would have to drop their prices for a loong time to have any chance of 'busting' Nikon, and they would lose a lot of money in the process.

I think Canon is better of selling their gear at a higher price, even though they will lose some of the available market to Nikon.

Right now it seems Canon is trying to make inroads into the video market, with several video specific cameras released, and in that market they are facing competition from much bigger vendors than Nikon.

I have read in the forums that Canon are three times the size of Nikon.

Yes, and Nikon is probable three times the size of Fuji (camera divisionally speaking)

If Canon as a company are three times larger than Nikon, why don't they drastically drop their prices on DSLR's and lenses.

Why would you make a division running bad by means of cost/profit ratio? You're stockholders will go mad about it. Drastically running prices down will mean drastically running quality down as well.

As a side note, ever wondered why Leica is still there?
It's not that they make the best camera's in the world

Then after a time when Nikon are bust, Canon can up their prices and charge what they want!

Nah, that will practically never work. and Canon will not even want that to happen for sure. Canon will expand in other parts of the media market more, getting ahead, it will create more money and it will keep your stockholders happy too.
Michel

-- hide signature --

To observe without evaluation is the highest form of human intelligence -

I'd love to see sales figures, but I would bet that the 5d2 sales beat the d700/d3s and d3X combined by a ratio of 5:1. Canon are plenty popular. Don't let the internet forums delude you!

And Justin Bieber may end up outselling The Beatles and the Rolling Stones put together. Your point? Popularity doesn't mean better, that is for certain. Nikon has been a more illustrious and important brand throughout the history of photography and it's likely there is nothing Canon can do to change that this fact.

Quality always wins out over quantity. Leica is a perfect example of that.

I'd love to see sales figures, but I would bet that the 5d2 sales beat the d700/d3s and d3X combined by a ratio of 5:1.

Yet the 5D2 is an inferior camera to each of the Nikon's here. And sales ratio's pulled from thin air don't really prove much.

Canon are plenty popular. Don't let the internet forums delude you!

Popularity is an indicator of what exactly? Marketing? The Twilight Series is one of the most popular movies of all time. Does that make it the best vampire movie, or even a good vampire film?

Canon has been falling behind in recent years because their sensor technology is simply not performing at the highest level. And in entry-level DSLRs, they had a hit in the Rebel/450D/Kiss series, but they've been extremely conservative and have been keeping fairly average sensors around all through their line-up, i.e. all Canon DSLR from 550D to 7D share the same 18 mp CMOS sensor. Nikon's more diversified line-up, with the hugely popular D3100 and the superb D7000 has given Nikon a bit more diversification in their consumer DSLR line-up. And in a few days, Nikon will release the 24 mp D3200 (yet another new sensor) to further up the ante. Ouch.

Canon is large because of printers. Nikon's sell well because they are great cameras. For people who know the difference, price is not the only criteria for choosing a camera. Personally I do not seen anything in the Canon line I would be interested in, not even their main product; printers. I don't like to spend all my time trying to fix artifacts, shadow noise and banding.
--

Sure, and Nikon only concentrates on making cameras. How about the newest Nikon FX series...

I'd love to see sales figures, but I would bet that the 5d2 sales beat the d700/d3s and d3X combined by a ratio of 5:1. Canon are plenty popular. Don't let the internet forums delude you!

And Justin Bieber may end up outselling The Beatles and the Rolling Stones put together. Your point? Popularity doesn't mean better, that is for certain. Nikon has been a more illustrious and important brand throughout the history of photography and it's likely there is nothing Canon can do to change that this fact.

Quality always wins out over quantity. Leica is a perfect example of that.

No need to be defensive! I wouldn't buy a 5d2 either, but it WAS/IS a VERY popular camera. I was simply replying to the guy who said that Canon are big because of printers. And I said that I'm sure the 5d2 outsold all Nikons of the same era. You can't deny that their cameras are very popular.

And for a company, their popularity IS all that matters. If a company becomes unpopular it will die. Leica make great cameras, but I'm pretty sure that Canon and Nikon make more profit.

And yes, Bieber is crap, but he's also a multimillionaire. It doesn't mean he is better, but it does mean that he is successful.